[ Date Index ][
Thread Index ]
[ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday 08 February 2003 11:22 am, Nick Kew wrote: > OK, I mentioned XMLRPC 'cos I've just been hacking it. But if M$ can > botch MIME to let in all those worms, what's to stop them doing the > same with XML? I'm sure they will sometime very soon, microsoft seems to htink everyhting should be executable :p > > maybe one day ;) Other things such as storing mail in XML format are > > first, imho. All the mail addons like MIME and PGP have just been hacked > > on. Somethign new needs to come about, first. > > XML is a medium for data exchange. It'll only really be useful for mail > when there's a proper content model (unless you want to count XMTP, > which is of course no more than a reformulation of SMTP). The part > that's now headers (vide RFC822 etc) should be reformulated as RDF > if we're proposing a wholesale replacement to SMTP[1]. Yup, exactly what needs to be done. > > though i'm a bit sceptical of the whole internet industry and it's > > incapabilities of looking forward, rather than concentrate *only* > > supporting the past right now; i can but dream, and hopefuly make a > > difference. > > Phooey. Some of us are innovating. There was no WEBDAV when I > implemented similar functionality in the mid-90s - to take just > one subject you've mentioned. Though insofar as I was innovating, > MSIE killed it off - along with other innovations that relied on > adequate HTTP support - when it started to become popular. > > > someone needs to wake up all the software and systems engineers workign > > for ISP's, they seem to have fallen sleep about 4 years ago, and not > > woken up since. > > Have you looked at the job ads recently? ISPs are asking for ASP > and Visual Basic. Or else they're in London and paying £17K. > You need to look elsewhere for innovation. This is the problem. It's the ISP's who should be comming up with the future protocols forward - after all, they are the people who shift the most mail, run the web servers, know the problems in running services in a large scale and for a large part decide what is and isn't supported on the internet. Of course, the second largest group are corperate customers, who for the most part seem to have just as sleepy personell in IT, although because I'm in the ISP industry rather than corperate IT, that's what i'm monaing about ;) > [1] My opinion: SMTP works well for what it was designed for, but in > these days of spam we need builtin traceability that'll work with > user-level tools, and proper accountability amongst admins. > So yes, I do accept the case for replacement. at least it's not just me and a few other engineers who see this ;) We've been working for a few months on and off now trying to find somethign that will scale well, virtually elimitate spam, and like you mentioned, tracability - the most important thing these days with spam and hoax emails. This is an area not much seems to have been done in - i've not seen any RFCs for a _complete_ rehash of the mail system, though i can't help but wonder if the world is ready, just yet. The biggest problem is goign to be the migration. How that'll work is still beyond me, though many a night a lay down thinking about it - i'm sure somethign will pop up in my head anyday soon ;) ~ Theo - -- Theo Zourzouvillys <theo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <http://theo.me.uk/> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+RSHm448CrwpTn6YRAjEzAKDZq8OYAbp82zSX5kEawlaG9DxAOwCdHhqW 0Z/nVfNQJBskjKr8HwQjQVY= =3wUj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.